The primary suspect in this case would be the Oakland-area Alameda County Sheriff's Department, who recently released a statement re. the department's (rapidly) evolving policy (-here-) regarding aerial drones, which they refer to in army-speak as an sUAS, or 'small Unmanned Aircraft System'...

Seems they're already rather-broadly approved within Alameda County for the following missions:

Post-incident crime scene preservation and documentation

Explosive ordinance disposal missions

Response to hazardous materials spills

Search and Rescue missions

Public safety and life preservation missions to include barricaded suspects, hostage situations, active shooters, apprehension of armed and dangerous and/or violent fleeing suspects, and high-risk warrants

Disaster response and recovery, to include natural and man-caused disasters incl. a full overview of a disaster area for post-incidental analysis and documentation

Training missions as authorized by the Training Certificate of Authorization

In response to specific requests from local, state, or federal fire authorities

When there is probable cause to believe that (1) the sUAS will record images of a place, thing, condition, or event; and (2) that those images would be relevant in proving that a certain felony had occurred or is occurring, or that a particular person committed or is committing a certain felony and use of the sUAS does not infringe upon the reasonable expectation of privacy

On a side note I wish I had a drone that was also some form of wi-fi hotspot, I say that because of another news event on the Gulf of Mexico of the stranded carnival ship, Triumph.

From what I have been hearing and that itself is very sparse because carnival is keeping the passengers from communicating what is really happening.

There has been food fights, people are pooping in bags and sleeping in tents on the open deck, no running water or sanitation, no cell phone usage. The very few who are getting out have used sat phones or relayed messages to a passing ship, they are literally prisoners.

Hobbyists is what I was thinking. There are some pretty amazing hobby craft flying. Some feature put you in the cockpit cameras. They also displat GPS info on the operators screen. Some screens are built into goggles!

I’d like to have one!

Of course there will soon be outrage over people flying them around neighborhoods. Can you imagine one hovering over a sunbathing babe or outside a bedroom window?

There are some small ones going on sale next month that will home in on you and follow you around recording what you do. Several could fly in formation around you.

Look for a ban soon!

14
posted on 02/12/2013 4:08:29 AM PST
by prisoner6
(Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution together as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)

check out how high they have to fly... if they fly below a certain altitude they are in violation of FCC regs. If they are over your property, and your land is a certain acerage (5 acers here in VA.) you can shoot it down....

20
posted on 02/12/2013 4:22:38 AM PST
by SouthernBoyupNorth
("For my wings are made of Tungsten, my flesh of glass and steel..........")

“Shadows against a clear blue sky? Probably photod against a blue table cloth. I call BS.”

Its real. I can’t find the link right now but you can buy those off the shelf. They are auto-piloted using built in GPS. Just tell it where to go using a computer interface and it flies itself to that point. It’s also programmable for fairly complex flight plans.

They come with options for cameras and other light payloads.

21
posted on 02/12/2013 4:27:06 AM PST
by driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)

Since video cameras would be the first element of its payload, a duck load would identify the person who shot it down. However, I've got to believe that those cameras aren't looking up. The lack of hemispherical situational awareness of the operator is my chief argument against them being allowed to operate above 500 ft AGL. $50-60 will get you a sacrificial RC helo that could try to land on top of the offending voyeur ("Peeping Tom" for those of you in Rio Lindo). Not that I would ever do such a destructive thing, of course. Merely speculating what could happen.

23
posted on 02/12/2013 4:31:19 AM PST
by Pecos
(If more sane people carried guns, fewer crazies would get off a second shot.)

If I were to get something like this and just have it hovering over say ... police headquarters or a federal building or maybe the neighborhood of some high profile politician how long would it take the laws to get changed?

Speaking purely hypothetically, of course, anything that hovers and is four feet across is a potential rifle target at up to five hundred yards away or more for the equally hypothetical skilled shooter.

Awww. You mean you don’t trust your government? Government is really nice people, they would neeeeevvvveeer violate innocent citizens’ rights. They would never snoop on people without a warrant. They would never violate our rights.

That’s a “hex-copter” (there are also “quad-copters” and “octo-copters” ... the antenna looking things are landing gear, and there’s a camera in a gimbal mount between them.

The multi-rotor copters are remarkably stable, and remarkably powerful. Each rotor is independently driven by its own miniature motor, computer control allows steering and directional motion by varying the speed of the individual motors.

45
posted on 02/12/2013 5:26:03 AM PST
by ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)

Hmm. In Oakland, they call that a drone. In my neck of the woods, we call that a “target.”

I’m sure the military models are hardened, high flying and fast making them difficult (or impossible) to shoot down with small arms, but the thing pictured here would be a sitting duck. Think what a net would do to that thing let alone a few rounds of 556.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.